ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Everyday decision-making in later life: the role of cognitive reserve and cognitive functions.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to investigate decision-making competence of midlife and older adults, and its relationship with cognitive reserve and cognitive functions. Methods: A total of 120 healthy adults (aged 50 to 90 years) completed a decision-making task and various neurocognitive tests. In the decision-making task, participants encountered everyday scenarios with two options, including relevant and irrelevant numerical information, formatted as frequencies or percentages. In congruent trials, the relevant and irrelevant information pointed to the same decision, while in incongruent trials they pointed to opposing decisions. Cognitive reserve (CR) was measured using a composite index reflecting lifetime education, professional experiences, and engagement in cognitively demanding leisure activities. Results: Participants demonstrated higher accuracy in congruent trials than in incongruent ones, with this difference being more pronounced among individuals with lower CR. Additionally, decision-making performance decreased with increasing age for both number formats, with a steeper decline observed in trials involving frequencies. CR, along with measures of judgement, mental calculation, and health numeracy, accounted for 41% of the variance in decision-making performance. CR also moderated the relationship between decision-making performance and health numeracy: participants with poorer numeracy skills performed accurately if their CR level was high. Discussion: This study confirms the positive relationship between CR and decision-making ability in advanced age. Higher levels of CR are linked to reduced decline in health numeracy with age and lower susceptibility to conflicting information during decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.